Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-12-24

Within the past few years there has been q re-
vival OF the Shakespeare Bacon controversy. At
present, here In America at least Vim. Ignatius
Donnelly seems TO be the champion on the Bacon
side OF the case, l. e. II we may thus refer to the
situation. For the Bacon interest, this contro-
versy has been pushed. There Is no lack OF cham.
p0ns Tor the Shakespeare side; his admirers are
not, however, pushing any claim; indeed there Is
no call for any active or aggressive warfare on
their part. Their hero has stood before the world
for more than two and hall centuries. He was
not unknown TO the best men OF his day, ana by
them acknowledged TO be at least peer, in a gal
axy OF superior minds In AN age that produced
many wonderful men. Mr. Donnelly builds his
argument on two ideas; the one, that Shakespeare
was ignorant, too ignorant TO be the auI hor OF
such productions; the other. that Bacon has left
the nrsI place Shakespeare was not so ignorant
as Mr.. Donnelly ~oaId attempt to prove. He
says Shakespeare was a butchers boy; then
have been very coarse and ignorant. Such
reasoning Is well worthy Of the subject. II,
memory, and use our powers OF observation, we
VIII readily see many examples In ancient and
modern times wherein worthy parents are forced
TO occupy some humble position In life. Never
theless they have superior mental ability, and
this Is reproduced IN their offspring. On the same
line OF reasoning, Mr. Lincoln could never have
produced the Immortal Gettysburg speech; that
honor should be conferred upon the great orator,
scholar and statesman, Edward Everett. The
times are changed now; but suppose Abraham
similar occasion two hundred and rirty or three
hundred years ago; 10 the light OF sucn reasoning
where would Nj. Lincoln stand to-day9 From ali
we learn OF Shakespeare he was very Indifferent 10
fame; while Bacon Was one OF the most Jealous
courtiers that ever stood, or attempted TO stand,
Jealous was he OF his name that he wrote his
works In Latin. in order that they might the bet
ter be preserved and read by future generations
With such q fact before US. IL would have seemed
most natural and consistent, had Bacon written
these immortal dramas, and desired to claim them
for him TO have left them In Latin as he did his
ghaPW 4 lis Mr. dnin
so Is certainly very strong aigun mt against
these claims
OF head. In the days OF Shakespeare and Ba-
con this was not apparently studied; stu two
conventional heads have come down TO US. The
one is well rounded, like tue full sack. fine
forehead, nne perceptions, high in the crown and
well developed in those regions that are peculiar
to the poet and philosopher; This is the Shake
speare head The other is also Intellectual but IL
is square and angular, the head OF the scholar and
imltator a head with a capaity to learn, but
not OF ready perception and intuition.
Those on the Bacon Side OF this controversy
should get the artists OF The world to change the
names on the conventional heads. The full, nigh,
well-rounded. clear-cut head, they should insist
WAS Bao0l's while the square, angular head was
Shakespeare's. BY the time they have succeeded
In establishing this artistic change they may
vert the world to this absurd idea. In addition
to this Shakespeare had, as every great poet and
writer has, his peculiar style. In none OF his
writings does Bacon reveal such a STYLE In art
Sir Joshua Reynolds might as well be accredited as
the author OF Turner's pictures, or In music Mo-
Fart be credited with Beethovens works Mr.
DOnnelly shows that there are similar and even
Identical expressions In Bacon and Shakespeare.
ana this he seems to think conclusive and uuan.
sweraDle. II he would reflect on the subject a
tile further he would readily see that In order to
prove anything by such evidence he must 20 fur
Their and prove beyond controversy that Bacon did
not take those ideas from shakespeare, anu that
they were original with his favorite. From all we
know Of Bacon. and from good authority, too, he
WAS not The most honest man who ever lived. He Is
represe nted be .ng dishonest as he was vain;
AMI such being the case, II Is very doubtful II one
half OF what he attempted " Claim he was justly
entitled 70. He had the advantage OF foreign
travel, which Shakespeare mad not He thereby
had tue opportunity 10 PICK up Intellectual
crumbs that he could, and evidently did, Use TO
advanta ye. But this very controversy shows that
those WAC attempt 70 benttie Shakespeare do not
mind he made no pretenses even at originality.
Many OF the plays and expressions he used ante
dated him hundreds OF years To illustrate, had
he lived in our day and been familiar, say with
he would have done so, but he would have wreathed
into II his own philosophy and sayings He was
like arst-class story-teler VINO hears "a story. He
re-telis t In his own unique and torciole manner,
and brings down the house. so ne took old
material and worked It over 10 suit the time and
fact that many, II not all, Ills dralnas are found
on old tales and material well known To the
worlds eyes before he was born. HIS thoughts
gave TO them Character that they never before
This will account for Identical passages 10 the
", rks OF Bacon. Bacon was vain man OF the
world who sought TO claim everything. shake
peare was an artist, who not only gathered
material wherever he could md II, but who put
through his mind. AT this day to attempt TO be-
little hin or TO transfer his Just claims TO man
IKE Bacon 10 most absurd. LP.N.